Great article from the Gospel Coalition

CONGREGATIONS HAVE 

WISH-DREAMS TOO

A thought provoking article on why people are really leaving the church

Dear Church, Here’s Why People Are Really Leaving You

All of T.J. Addington's books are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 discount on orders of ten or more.

Hijacked churches

I believe that leaders are called to lead at specific times in the history of a church. And, that their unique abilities and vision is critical to the next chapter of a congregations success. However, I have also watched with concern a phenomenon of new leaders coming into a church and essentially hijacking it for their own purposes. What are the signs of a church hijack?

One. There is a criticism of the past as if nothing good came out of it. The new leader/pastor talks about the future and implicitly or explicitly denigrates the past. This forgets that those who gave their energy, money and talent in the past made the church what it is today and provided the platform for a new leader to build on the past. Every leader stands on the shoulders of those who led in in the past unless they start something new. And the people who are there when they come are God's flock.

Two. The new leader does not ask and take into account the vision and dreams of the leadership or congregation but rather inserts their dreams as the vision for the future. When we come into a new church as a new leader we do not come into a vacuum. We come into a congregation with a history and a vision, whether vague or focused. It is critical that we take that vision into account and not simply impose our own vision as if the past does not exist.

Three. Being willing to see many people leave so that a new leader can achieve their dreams. I have watched new pastors see hundreds of people leave the church because they have imposed their agenda on it without being at all concerned about the views and concerns of those who leave. It is as if they are willing to sacrifice the past to achieve their vision of the future. As a change agent I fully understand that some people leave when a new leader or vision comes but when significant people leave it is more about the agenda of the new leader than a shared vision for the church.

Four. Marginalizing current staff. Again, there is no question that a new leader needs to build their own team. However, when it comes at the expense of qualified and good staff who have served well it probably indicates that the new leader is anxious to get rid of the past and put their own stamp on the future. It is often a sign of their insecurity rather than security.

Five. Imposing a new vision that is unnecessarily a break from the past. Good leaders don't move faster than their constituency can follow and they honor and give value to those who are there. Sometimes it takes time to get to where we want to go. Jesus never marginalized people in the pursuit of His mission other than the Pharisees. 

Six. Not listening to the concerns of the current constituency. This is one of the key indicators of a leader who is hijacking a ministry for their own purposes. When there is not a concern for the vision, concerns, ideas and issues raised by those who have come before there is an arrogant rather than humble attitude of leadership. And, it usually results in divided, wounded and conflicted congregations because of the agenda of a new leader who does not choose to take into account what has come before them.

When leaders hijack a church, they leave a trail of wounded bodies and hearts behind them. Because it is God's church, many leave or suffer quietly but it does not excuse those who deliver that pain or lack of sensitivity. It is very sad when it happens and often results in deeply wounded congregations. I have a very hard time reconciling this behavior with the values of Jesus and how he treated people - His flock. It also seems to violate the advice Peter gave to under-shepherds in 1 Peter 5.  The question is whether it is ultimately more about them then about Jesus and His flock. Ministry platforms can and are used for personal agendas all the time. Unfortunately!

All of T.J. Addington's books are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 discount on orders of ten or more.

The Church: Helping people grow up

Here is an interesting concept: The church is a place where we help people grow up! We have a Father and the Father wants us to grow up in Him from kids to maturity. Jesus accepts us for who we are but wants us to become like who He is. Maturity is the goal according to Paul in Ephesians 4. 

Think about some of the implications of this. Many people expect the church to be the source of their spiritual growth. That is the perspective of immaturity. Growing up means that I take responsibility for my spiritual life and don't outsource it to others.

How many congregations deal with petty conflicts? Growing up means that we treat one another with honor and dignity, allow others to think differently than ourselves and living in peace rather than in conflict.

Many leadership groups in the local church find it hard to agree to corporate decisions. We want our way like toddlers who won't let others play with their toys. Growing up means that we have respectful discussion, make corporate decisions and agree to live by them.

Often our congregations think that the church is primarily for their benefit. Growing up means that we choose to live like Jesus and reach out to those who are not yet in the church. If the church is about me I am living from immature selfishness. If the church is about others who need to hear the Good News I am living in maturity and generosity.

Growing up is a great metaphor for what the church is about and what the Christian life is about. Where do you (and I) need to grow up? Where does our congregation need to grow up? 

Antiquated church governance systems that hurt the mission of the church

A fundamental concept for any governance system (how you do leadership) is that the system should serve the mission. Unfortunately, there are still many churches that are living with antiquated and ineffective governance systems that actually hurt the congregation's ability to do what Jesus called them to do. In these cases, the mission ends up serving the governance system - the opposite of what ought to be the case.

Poor governance systems tend to be "permission withholding" structures rather than "permission granting" structures. 

In permission withholding structures:

• Decisions must be made more than once
• Permission and agreement must be negotiated with multiple groups
• Timely decisions are tough
• There is confusion of authority and responsibility
• Church bylaws are confusing and bureaucratic
• It is hard to make decisions and implement them
• The mission of the church is compromised

In permission granting structures:

• Decisions are made once
• There is no need to negotiate permission with multiple groups
• There are clear lines of authority and responsibility
• Church bylaws are brief and allow for flexibility
• It is easy to make decisions and implement them
• Timely decisions are easy
• The mission of the church is easier to implement because the systems support the ability of leaders to lead.

Jesus designed the church to be the most effective, flexible, and missional organization on the face of the earth. Permission-withholding structures (most antiquated church governance systems) make the church inflexible, relatively ineffective and certainly compromise its mission. If your governance systems are antiquated and no longer help fulfill your mission, be courageous enough to change them. The third section of "High Impact Church Boards" provides a roadmap for changing your governance systems.

Do we expect too much from our church and too little from Jesus?

I suspect that in the United States, we expect too much from the local church and too little from Jesus. Let me explain.

Church hopping is endemic today. American evangelicals are consumers of the local church and often deeply dissatisfied with what they have. Often for good reason. We want the best preaching, the best music, the best programming for our kids and the best of everything else. And we hope that our experience will change our life with Jesus - making us happy, fulfilled, and be there for us always.

I understand the frustration. Healthy churches are hard to find and even then they don't always fill the hole in our hearts. But perhaps we are looking in the wrong place for the fulfillment we seek. Not that the local church is unimportant, it is the Bride of Jesus and we are to be connected to the Bride. We need the people of God and the community of Jesus. They are our our encouragement, our help and our ministry partners.

But - if the church  becomes our substitute for our personal relationship with Jesus, if we expect that the church will fill the hole in our heart that only God can fill, perhaps our dissatisfaction comes from substituting the church for what should be a close personal walk with Jesus. The fact is, no church and no person can bring the joy that Jesus does. It can help us walk the pilgrimage of faith and we are called to walk that walk with others. The church is the bride of Jesus but it is not a substitute for Jesus in our personal lives.

We will never find the perfect church because we are in it. We can find the perfect Christ because that is who he is. We cannot  abandon the church which is the community of God but nor can we substitute the church for a deep personal relationship with Jesus. He is the source of life and satisfaction. The people of God are a necessary bonus and the church is the constant reminder of the God we worship. The church contributes to the walk we have with God but it never becomes the substitute for a relationship with the Lord of the Church, Jesus.

Something to think about.

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

The greatest failure and greatest opportunity of the church today

The western church is good at many things: Facilities; trained staff; worship experiences; programming and good preaching. From an external perspective it is in many cases impressive. However, our focus on all these good things comes at the expense of the one most central and important thing which is that of disciplemaking. It is both the greatest failure and greatest opportunity of the church today.

Why the greatest failure? Because only deeply committed disciples of Christ will make a difference in our world for Him. It is those individuals who live out their faith in their family, workplace and in the circles in which they have influence. Much of what passes for Christianity is more window dressing than it is a committed followership where people understand and live out grace, allow their thinking to be brought into alignment with Scripture, align their priorities with those of Christ and see people as Jesus sees them and love them as He loves them.

Furthermore we have substituted life on life influence and impact for classes and intellectual knowledge which is not the route to lifestyle change nor the model given us by Jesus and Paul. Disciplemaking is simply another program in our church (an app) rather than the heart of all that we do (the operating system). And if one examines the typical commitments of the typical "Christian" we see that it is not an effective model. It may train people in certain behaviors but it does not lead to significant life transformation.

Why the greatest opportunity? Because there is nothing more powerful than men and women who have given Jesus everything and want to please Him and represent Him in all that they do. These are world changers. They are world changers empowered by the Holy Spirit who are powerful change agents precisely because of their followership of Jesus. 

How did they become what they became? Usually not because of a church with great preaching or programs (although I appreciate both). Rather, because like Jesus with His disciples, someone took them alongside them and either formally or informally deeply influenced their life and priorities toward those of Jesus. Not a set of rules but a way of life. Not to become like them but to become like Jesus. Not through a program but through a process - a journey of becoming more like Jesus.

Disciple making, if it is going to be effective must move:
From a program to a process
From the class room to life on life
From one size fits all to customized
From optional to an expectation
From clergy led to everyone's involvement
From intellectual knowledge to life transformation and application
From being discipled to also being a disciplemaker
From "listen to me" to "do with me"

Remember, it is disciples in a Jesus sense who change the world!

(Written from Berlin, Germany)

The church and its avoidance or engagement with society

I meet many believers who seem to think that the local church is there to protect them against the ills of society. In fact, whether it is explicitly said, it is certainly implicit in the kind of programming the typical church does that keeps people busy at church and leaves very little time for engagement with their community, unbelieving friends or other activities (sports being the notable exception). There is a bunker mentality among many believers that sees the church as their protection against the evils of our world.

It is a sadly mistaken view of what God intended for us as believers. If Jesus is our model all one needs to do is look where he spent much of his time and with whom - sinners. And I am talking corrupt officials (tax collectors), prostitutes, adulterers, and everyone that the pharisees found objectionable. In fact, Jesus did not fear the world, does not want us to forsake the world but does want us protected from the evil one. Thus He prayed in His high priestly prayer of John 17, "My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one."

Thus a lifestyle of avoidance of the world is actually directly contrary to the example of Jesus and His will for our lives. For without engagement there is no opportunity for the good news of the gospel to become known or for the Gospel to transform people, communities and institutions. In fact, it is genuine engagement with people that Jesus modeled and the New Testament teaches. It is engagement with our world on behalf of Jesus rather than avoidance that is His desire for us.

Here is an interesting question: How many unbelieving friends (true friends) do you have and how much time do you spend with them? For many Christ followers that is an uncomfortable question since the answer is few or none. That is a life of avoidance, not engagement. When Jesus tells us to go into all the world and make disciples He is not saying "write a check to support a missionary far away" although that is a good thing to do. The "Go" is to all of us where we are, with whom we work and live and play and it is everyone's job to make disciples.

For the tech savvy, the combined Klout score of your congregation (see www.klout.com) is the combined number of meaningful relationships your congregation has with unbelievers. Unfortunately, the Klout scores of most congregations is terribly low. But it needn't be. 

If you are a pastor or church leader, ask the question: "Is the mentality of our congregation more about avoidance or engagement?" And, "What is basis for your answer?"

The purpose of the church is not to avoid the world but to overcome the world.

(Written from Berlin, Germany)

When people leave your church

OK lets face it. It hurts when people leave the church we pastor. We take it personally and in most cases should not. We forget that individual circumstances and needs vary and we cannot meet them all no matter how hard we try. In fact, if we were in the pew, rather than in the pulpit, we might leave too - depending on our circumstances.

I am not advocating a culture of moving from church to church. And frankly it is not the movers that cause us angst but those who have been with us for a long season. It is their leaving that hurts. But think about this:

If they leave because they are unhappy with us as the pastor, why did we assume that we could please all those who come? If we have had an influence in their lives that is good and will pay off for the rest of their lives. If their needs change or their stage of life changes, how can we be unhappy that they need a change? Often the issue is more about us than it is about them. 

If they leave because because of unresolved issues with us then we need to do all we can to resolve those issues. It may be painful but it can be redemptive and instructional for us. If our actions, attitudes or words have caused pain it is good for us to hear that and to learn from it. It is not about trying to convince them to come back but rather making peace and learning from it.

I think the most painful situations are when many people leave and it is then that we need to sit up and take notice. Why are they leaving and what have we missed, if anything that has caused their leaving? Sometimes it is because we and the leaders have made intentional changes that we are committed to and we will be sad but realistic with the leaving. Other times, it is because we have been unwise in our actions and it is a reaction to our decisions. 

Understanding the reasons is the important thing. If we need to learn from them we should. If we and our leaders are committed to a course of action that is right in the long run we need to take the hit in the short run. This is all about understanding the reasons and being willing to incur the cost when renovation or change is necessary.

Sometimes it is necessary for disaffected people to leave a church so that the church can move forward with greater health and missionality. Sometimes we push people out for unhealthy reasons.

When people leave, understand the reasons!

My view of the church: Irrational optimism and deep realism

As one who serves the global church and has worked with hundreds of churches, some healthy, some not I have seen almost everything. It would be easy to become cynical or discouraged by the range of issues, problems and challenges. 

In spite of all of its flaws I have an irrational optimism for the church: Not because of how well we do but because the Holy Spirit is present and the church is His Bride that He intents to purify for the bridegroom on His return. And it is God's chosen instrument to reach the world and to make disciples. In spite of all of its flaws it is a divine institution with a divine mandate empowered by divine power. We may give  up on the church but Jesus never will!

That does not mean that I am not deeply realistic! God's people have an unlimited capacity for getting in the way of what God wants to do in His church. We rely on ourselves instead of Him; we allow what is to be missional to become institutional; we often lead poorly; live in disunity rather than unity and hurt the very people that are part of our family. 

Yet God remains patient, forgiving and continues to send His Holy Spirit to empower us whenever we ask! He cares deeply for His bride and will never abandon it. It's flaws do not reflect Him but rather us in every respect. And if we are the cause of its dysfunctions we ought to become the agents of its health and vitality. 

In whatever capacity we serve, every one of us either contributes to a healthy or unhealthy church. While leadership matters - a lot - the truth is that each of us influences the health of the Bride. The church has many critics. It needs many advocates. Which role do you play? While I am sure the heart of Jesus is saddened by much of what we do and don't do in the church He does not abandon it. He gave His life for it (for us) and we in return ought to love what He loves and be an advocate for what He is committed to.

Thus my deep realism but also my irrational optimism! Realism about us, optimism about God. And ultimately, He is the head of the church!

The churches frightful kodak moment

A very insightful article for those who are involved in ministry or are disillusioned with much of what happens in the American church.

Deconstructing the American church

We often do not realize how much the church in the United States is driven by the culture of our nation rather than by the culture of God's Kingdom. Let me share some examples!

Success
For many church leaders success is defined in the American church by numbers of people, size of budgets, wonderful facilities, large staff and excellent programming. All of those are societal definitions of success rather than New Testament definitions of success which are about God's people actually looking like Jesus and non believers crossing the line to belief. Within my own denomination there are pastors who are driven to have their congregations hit a thousand so that they can become a part of the "K club." Does Jesus value the large church over the small church? Does church size in itself have anything to do with success?

Transformation of lives where we understand and live out grace, where we think like Jesus, prioritize our lives around His priorities and see people and love people as Jesus sees them and loves them is a Kingdom definition of success. Size is not - except in our culture!

Consumerism
It is what drives our nation and often it is what drives our ministries. We are used to being served when we are called to serve. We are used to being comfortable when we are called to the often uncomfortable life of a pilgrim. 

We are used to being entertained and pity the pastor who cannot do so. So much of our nation is about me and we rather than about what I can do to serve others, serve God and enhance His Kingdom. Just as the quarterly reports drive our consumer society so our numbers and whatever we need to do to enhance them drive many ministries. Most church growth is simply the reshuffling of believers from one venue to a better venue - until an even better one comes along.

Consumers expect to be made comfortable, get what they paid for, be served and entertained. Think about Jesus and His expectations and life. It was not a consumer mentality but a God oriented mentality committed to the concerns of His Father and not even of Himself (notwithstanding that He was God). Yet we often feed the consumer side of the church!

Competition
I spoke to a pastor recently about why they had made changes in their ministry. He candidly admitted that he did so because another large church in the area had planted an venue in his neighborhood and they needed to differentiate themselves. We compete in all areas of life in our nation and it is usually no different in the church. Cooperation, a sign of unity, is of far less value to us regardless of the High Priestly Prayer of Jesus for the same (John 17) then winning - being better.

I could go on and I don't have all the answers. What I do believe is that we need to deconstruct the American church and reconstruct it on New Testament and Kingdom values: The making of disciples, calling people to a life of followership, serving others, caring deeply for the lost, loving on our communities, using our gifts for His purposes, a true stewardship of our resources, time, energy and abilities and lives that actually look like that of Jesus.

All of us live in a society that has its own set of values. Jesus made it clear that His Kingdom has a different set of values - hence for instance, The Sermon on the Mount. Discerning leaders are clear as to which values belong in His church and in our lives. The ability to discern the difference between the two sets of values is a critical skill of church leaders.

Great article from the Wall Street Journey on the perils of "Wannabe cool" Christianity.

This article says a lot about many churches today. And it is not the kind of church I seem to read about in the New Testament - contextualization aside. It is well worth a read!

The Perils of "wannabe cool" Christianity

The unique fingerprint of your church

God's creativity is amazing. With 7 billion people on our planet, no two fingerprints are alike. No two people are alike.

And, no two congregations are alike. But too often we try to make "our ministry" look like "another ministry," because we like the "success" of that ministry. The problem is that you cannot clone congregations. And when one tries, we lose the uniqueness that God built into that particular congregation. Leaders who try to emulate someone else's ministry not only are chasing an impossible dream but they are denying the uniqueness that God intentionally built into their church.

Plastic surgeons get patients all the time who want to change something so that they can look like some celebrity who is rated as the picture of what a beautiful person should look like. They are chasing a dream that is not real. And, usually not necessary.

Church leaders do it as well - by trying to become something they are not. Just as people chase a dream with plastic surgery - when they use it to emulate someone else - so church leaders can be caught in the same trap.

Success for every congregation is living out the Great Commandment and serving the Great Commission. It is not found in the particular program, music style or the number of people we can gather on a particular weekend.

The fingerprint of a congregation is a unique blend of its ministry philosophy, history, geography and neighborhood, the gifting of its people, its vision, and the gifting of its leaders. And, because of its unique fingerprint, God will use it in unique ways. In fact, it is in a diversity of ministries that the church will be most effective and reach the broadest swath of people.

If we can celebrate diversity of ethnicities and the uniqueness of each individual, why cannot we celebrate the diversity of congregations: large, small, in-between, house church, cell church, ethnic, traditional, non-traditional, seeker driven, seeker sensitive, inner city, suburban, rural, high church, low church, or just church!

We ought to be all that God made us to be and maximize our unique potential and commit to health, honoring Christ, becoming like Christ, living out the Great Commandment and committed to the Great Commission. And celebrate the unique opportunity that God has given us as a congregation.

God would be delighted if:

We could learn from one another but not try to be one another.

We would celebrate one another's ministry and not covet the unique mandate of another church.

In our success we would not assume that other ministries should look like us - leadership hubris.

We would gladly cooperate with one another and not be threatened by one another.

We humbly claimed our place in ministry and maximized our opportunity as a congregation.

He would be delighted because he has given every congregation a unique fingerprint. Celebrate it. Maximize its uniqueness. Don't try to be someone God did not make you to be.

I am privileged to work with many different kinds of churches. I am always amazed at the creativity and passion of healthy leaders and the unique ways they are making a difference for Christ. I learn something new with every church I consult with. It is in our uniqueness that we are effective, learn new ways of reaching people, innovate and reach those God has called us to reach.

Shallow CliffsNotes Christianity

As I survey the contemporary evangelical church today in the west I would often characterize it as shallow, lacking in substance, Christianity light and easy grace. In some cases, there is not much difference between a self help seminar (think Tony Robins) and what is shared in the name of God’s word from the pulpit – as if the Scriptures are primarily a self help manual that if followed will bring us prosperity and health. Certainly it should not get too personal or interfere with our lives.

Some will think this too critical and I don’t desire to be an angry modern day prophet who throws stones. And, I am sure based on past history that I will lose some Twitter followers over this blog. That being said, here are some of the things we don’t see among many western evangelicals that lead me to my conclusion.

One: suffering seems to be a lost subject and we are surprised when it surfaces in our lives. When it does it often causes Western believers to question the goodness of God and leads many to bitterness and doubt. Yet, Jesus made it abundantly clear that the way of the cross is the way of suffering. What does it mean when He says, “Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me (Luke 9:23).” A cross is, by definition the metaphor for suffering and Jesus says it is a daily occurrence for those who follow Him. The Apostle Paul talked with emotion about sharing in the fellowship of His sufferings.

Two: Western believers as a group are, (how do I say it?), stingy with God. The average evangelical gives something like two percent of their income back to Him. Now, in case you think I have gone legalistic here, bear with me a moment. It is not about legalism but about value. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16).

I believe that we have so cheaply sold what God did on our behalf, even though He gave His only son – to become sin for us so that we could know Him who knew no sin – and be justified through His righteousness and death on our behalf that our gratitude is shallow and our response is cheap. Second Corinthians 8 and 9 speak of giving as a direct response to His grace. If that is so our giving does not reflect much value toward His amazing grace but is often pocket change tossed into His hat on occasion. We simply don’t value His gift to us very much as evidenced by our response.

Three: American evangelicalism has very little to say about sin. OK, I don’t like the subject much either but Scripture has a lot to say about it in relation to a Holy God. The Scriptures talk about sin on 1365 occasions. But mostly this gets lost in the CliffsNotes version of Evangelicalism. After all you have to cut somewhere and this is most convenient place to do it.

Except, that without an understanding of my depravity I cannot understand God’s grace. Why did the woman in John 12:3 use all of her saving to pour pure nard on the feet of Jesus and then wipe them clean with her hair? She understood her sin and therefore the amazing grace that Jesus had blessed her with. Her desire to follow was directly connected with the grace she had been given and her acute awareness of her fallen condition. A sinless Christianity is a cheap parody of the true human condition – even those who know and follow Jesus. Paul described himself as the chief of sinners and that was toward the end of his life. It is what drove him to live in God’s grace on a daily basis.

Four: We are far more consumed with our, lives, careers, pleasures and interests than we are with joining God in His work in our world. Some of the blame here can be laid at the door of the church that has defined ministry as what happens inside its four walls with its programs. Thus, I minister when I bow to the church’s agenda and fill needed spots in their programs. But what ever happened to ministry being with the people I work with and live with or who hang out at the local tavern? Where was Jesus found most of the time?

That being said, in general, we are so consumed with our agendas that we lose sight of God’s agenda – which requires that we read His book, another lost art (I am heartened by the Eat This Book challenge that has thousands of believers reading through the Bible this year). When our life agenda takes precedence over God’s agenda we have reimaged God after our own image.

Five: American Evangelicals don’t truly believe that lost people are lost for eternity apart from a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. We are more likely to share our latest weight loss plan than we are Jesus. Losing weight has its place, and I am vigorously pursuing that, but the Gospel is good news for time and eternity. If we do believe that lost people are truly lost apart from Jesus, we assume that it is the church’s responsibility to share the news not us.

When I tell my wife I love her but don’t demonstrate that love she knows my words are shallow and lack sincerity. When we tell God we love Him but don’t walk the walk of our talk we are guilty of shallow Christianity. What do you think when you consider the Western version of evangelicalism? There are wonderful exceptions of course but I fear that our version of Christianity is often far more cultural than it is Biblical.

Having written this, I am of course obliged to consider each of these five areas in light of my own life and practice: irritating but instructive. Come to think of it, maybe I’ll unsubscribe me from Twitter as well. I don’t like being uncomfortable any more than others.

Your church board is unhealthy but you are not on it and don't know what to do about it

It is not unusual that I receive emails or calls from individuals who want to know what to do about an unhealthy church board - in their church. They see that the board does not have its act together, they see the results of that dysfunction (including pastors whom they love leaving) but they feel impotent to affect real change. I have found myself in that situation at times and I am sure many others have as well.

In some cases, it is even worse for the fact that they know that the board has sought help but has rejected the advice they received and they muddle on in their dysfunction and that dysfunction is negatively impacting the church body as it always does. The consequence of sick boards is inevitably a sick church - but what do you do about it if you are in the church watching? 


Before I suggest a course of action, we need to recognize that there is a deeper problem to a sick board and that is that the congregation does not have a good way to vet potential leaders. Good leaders don't allow their board to get sick. Poor choices of church leaders and poor board leadership result in sick boards.


That being said, what does one do? The first thing we need to do is to make this a matter of prayer. This is a deeply spiritual issue for a congregation and for us as well. Unless our own attitude is right, we will add to the already problematic situation with our own anger which adds fuel to the fire. The evil one love sick boards and church fights. Don't give him that joy.


Second, commit to yourself that you will never intentionally "hurt the bride of Christ." Your local congregation is a local representation of Christ's bride, no matter how dysfunctional. Your board, through their lack of healthy leadership may already be hurting the church. You don't want to contribute to that hurt. I would rather quietly leave a church (and I have) rather than to contribute to church conflict.


Third, be honest with what you see with board members you can speak to.Give them your observations about what you see happening and how it is impacting the church. Ask questions, speak for yourself (not others) and clearly state your concerns.


If matters continue, I would consider doing the same thing in a congregational meeting if I believed it might make a difference - carefully. I would state my personal concerns, making it clear again that I speak for myself and not others doing so without a personal attack or hidden agenda. If I thought that saying something would not make a difference I would refrain and keep my own counsel.


Some will disagree with this and that is fine. If I thought that there was little chance that the dysfunction could be solved, I would leave the church and look for a healthy one. Unhealthy churches produce unhealthy disciples, muddle along without direction and are a magnet for people who like conflict. Do you want to be a part of that and do you want to bring your friends to a place with that ethos? It can be painful to leave a church but fortunately most of us have other expressions of the bride that are available to us. Obviously we need God's direction in such issues but we are often naive in believing that things will change.


Congregations, like families often have dysfunctional "family systems" which support that dysfunction. They make it hard to voice differing opinions or even to leave. In other words, the very church culture prevents the dysfunction from being dealt with. It is  a closed circle that does not allow outside views (taken to an extreme one has a cult). Sometimes you don't realize how unhealthy the culture is until you are out of that culture and experience the freedom of a healthy church. Closed systems rarely change and trying to affect change to a closed system will generally end up with you on the outside for trying. Even pastors have limited ability to impact a closed system which is why they often end up resigning when they find themselves in one (unless they are a part of it).


I often say that churches get what they deserve. Elect poor leadership and you get dysfunctional boards and congregations. Often such churches manage to repeat their same dysfunctions over and over again. I have met boards that did not want advice, did not want to own up to their own issues and proudly continued in their awful leadership. I feel for those in their church! I don't want to be a part of such a church. 

Spirits of criticism and negativity

If there is an attitude akin to cancer in a congregation it is a spirit of criticism and negativity. Few things are more disheartening to pastoral staff and few things are more divisive and dangerous to the life of a ministry than this. One church has just lost its pastor because of the criticism and negativity on the part of some congregants and some board members. Another church is probably going to lose their pastor. In both cases the congregation is far worse off for it. A ministry I know well has this spirit running through its entire office (not the one I work for which is a great blessing). 

Words and attitudes matter. They either build or tear down. They encourage or they discourage. I would go so far as to say that where such a spirit is pervasive it is not the spirit of the Father but of the evil one - even when wrapped in spiritual language.

This does not preclude honest dialogue. In our organization, robust dialogue is a huge value and anything can be put on the table that does not include a personal attack or a hidden agenda. The problem with critical and negative attitudes is that in many cases they are indeed personal attacks and there are personal agendas. There is a huge difference between critical and negative spirits and robust dialogue. It lies in the attitude and motivations behind it.


The truth is that we ought to treat one another as our Father treats us and as Jesus treated people in the gospels. Our attitudes and words are deeply spiritual issues for Jesus said in Matthew 7 that what comes out of us comes from what is inside us. Critical and negative people have a spiritual issue (and don't we all from time to time in this arena). It is sin and it comes from our lower nature.


In my view, church leaders ought to directly and boldly deal with pockets of critical spirits and negativity in their congregation because, like cancer they will eat away at the very core of your congregational health and it usually spreads. It is also one of the reasons I encourage churches to define the culture they want to see embedded in their church (see the book, Leading From the Sandbox). Once you have defined your culture you can hold individuals accountable for keeping the culture.

In the two churches I referenced above, I would not personally recommend that any pastor take them until the church has dealt with the insidious infection that is destroying them from within. And the pastor who left? I agreed with his decision to resign. The church and leadership were so unhealthy that it was destroying him as well. Don't ignore criticism and negativity when it pops up. It will hurt you and the cause of Jesus.

Grace, Transparency and the Church

One of the advantages of my work is that I get to visit many different churches each year - both in the US and globally. What is interesting to me is the continuum between churches with great personal transparency and those where such transparency is both lacking and most likely not safe. For some reason it is OK to struggle with sin and the issues of life prior to salvation but once saved, most evangelicals feel that they need to live up to some standard or culture that prevents honest transparency on issues that would actually aid in the process of sanctification.

It has often been said that if you want to get honesty go to the local bar rather than the local church. That is a sad commentary where it is true.

What we are left with are individuals who secretly struggle with all the baggage of life including addictions, sexual sin, temptations, attitudes, or basic identity issues and the very place where these struggles should be worked out - is often an unsafe place to reveal them. There are some wonderful exceptions to this where transparency and realness is practiced in a culture of grace and it is in those settings that I believe the most life change takes place because there is not a need to hide. Rather there is a shared journey toward wholeness, healing and Christ's character.

What sets such churches apart from the norm? I would suggest that there are several key factors. 

First, these churches have pastors and staff who value transparency and model it themselves. There is nothing more powerful than honest transparency from the pulpit. Like all organizational culture, this starts with a leader who communicates grace, acknowledges their own place in their spiritual journey and examples from their own lives. The more appropriate transparency there is from the pulpit the more transparent the culture of the congregation.

Second, transparent congregations tell many honest stories of life transformation. It takes one story, for instance from a couple who have struggled in their marriage and found healing and restoration to make it permissible for others who are struggling to admit their need for healing as well. Multiply those stories across the wide range of struggles people face and the healing that Christ brings. All of us, after all are on a journey of healing and spiritual formation. Telling stories of God's grace makes that journey from brokenness to wholeness normative and expected. People need to be know and encouraged that God can take their brokenness and redeem it no matter how broken they are.

Finally, these are congregations that understand and major on grace. We often focus on the need for grace to come to Christ. The truth is we need as much grace after salvation as before. We need grace every moment of every day. We cannot live up to God's expectations - or our own - unless we are living in the power of God's Spirit and daily appropriating His grace. The church is a place for broken people, those who are broken and need Christ and those who know Christ and need wholeness. 

Grace filled congregations are also humble congregations. They do not pretend to have it all together. They have leaders who admit their sin and live in dependence on God rather than in pride or self sufficiency. 

Church cultures like all organizational cultures are either accidental or deliberately created. A culture of grace and transparency can be deliberately developed. Grace and transparency encourage vulnerability and vulnerability is the first step toward growth. The church should be the premier place where we can journey from brokenness to wholeness.

Rethinking leadership selection in the church

There is no more important decision a church makes than who will serve on their senior leadership board. It is even more important than the pastor they hire because even the best pastor often cannot lead if saddled with a poor board and a poor process for choosing church leaders. In fact, the most powerful group in the church is those who choose new leaders.

I have blogged frequently on church boards because as the board goes – so goes the church and it can either be beautiful or ugly. The fact that the vast majority of churches in the United States are plateaued or in decline would indicate that there is a crisis in church leadership. Intentionality in how you choose your leaders can be a game changer for your congregation. I have several suggestions.

First, your nominating committee should be made up of the best leadership voices of the church which should include your senior pastor (he has to work with the chosen leaders) and key current board members (they know what is needed on the board). If representatives from the congregation at large are part of your equation, be sure that they understand the nature of leadership. The fact that they love Jesus does not qualify them to choose good leaders.

Second, be sure that those you choose have leadership ability. There is a fiction that the only qualification for leaders is that they are Godly individuals. That could not be further from the truth. Yes, they must be Godly but they must also be able to lead – the purpose of overseers, elders and leaders in the New Testament. Elsewhere I have shared eleven qualities that must be present at some level for leaders to lead well in the church.

Third, make sure that you have a leadership covenant that spells out how your board works together and that potential leaders understand and are willing to sign that covenant before you place them on a ballot. Every board is one member away from moving from healthy to dysfunctional. It is foolish not to guard the health of the board with rules of engagement.

Fourth, ensure that those you are considering are in alignment with the philosophy and direction of the church. Again, this is about guarding the health of the board and the church. This requires some significant discussion. One best practice is to have potential new leaders sit on the board for a year as potential leaders (without a vote) which gives them and you the ability to decide if this is a good fit. Such a practice also sends a message that this is an important decision and responsibility.

Fifth, eliminate competitive ballots. Your best leaders won’t agree to be on a competitive ballot and it sends a message that you don’t know what you are looking for but hope the congregation will make the right choice. Choose the right leaders and ask the congregation to vote yes or no but don’t make it competitive.

This is about guarding the gate of leadership. More importantly it is about crafting a leadership group that will keep the spiritual, missional and leadership ethos of the church at a high level and maximize the ministry opportunity of the congregation.

The choice of every church: Cooperation and Partnership or Competition and Autonomy

There are two choices that nearly every church in our nation has the opportunity to make: whether to compete or cooperate with other churches in their city or region. For most churches the choice is to compete since success is measured by numbers, programs and budgets. For a small but growing number of churches the choice is cooperation toward a higher goal of building His Church and reaching whole cities and communities for Christ.


I have no doubt that Christ himself would choose cooperation and partnership over competion and autonomy. But of course, Christ's definition of success is often different than ours - even what we do in His name.


“Did God call me to built a great church in my area or to reach my area for Christ?” was the question on the minds of a group of pastors in the Chicago area. What would happen if rather than competing with one another we actually joined together with other evangelical churches to make relevant, meaningful contact with every home in our city? What would happen if instead of caring just about “my” church we cared instead about The Church?




This is happening in Gurnee, Illinois where ten churches committed to evangelism are working together to bringing the gospel to every home in a city of 32,000 people. In Lake County Illinois, 45 churches are actively involved with scores of others participating in one way or another. Under the banner of Christ Together, churches are banding together across denominational lines and even theological differences in a major effort to reach whole cities and whole regions for Christ.


“The whole church bringing the whole gospel to the whole city” is the goal of Christ Together. The strategy gets its roots from the church in Acts 2 which banded together to reach the city for Christ. Churches who are involved see this effort not as an ancillary ministry but as one of the core ministries of their congregation. It is transforming churches, lives, and entire communities. Not only are these congregations working to bring the gospel to every household but they are banding together to serve the community in tangible ways as well.


What a refreshing difference from the autonomy and competition that marks so many ministries today!


Christ Together wants to help churches make five key shifts that they believe are consistent with the principles found in Acts 2.


“Move from Spiritually Struggling to Spiritually Transforming: We help churches to become agents of spiritual transformation, leading people into a vibrant, life-changing relationship with God.”


“Move from Relationally Fragmented to Relationally Connected: We help churches to build deep and trust-filled friendships with one another, enabling them to pursue God’s dreams for their city together.”


“Move from Functionally Anemic to Functionally Healthy: We help churches to overcome the pragmatic ministry challenges that threaten the strength and vitality of their faith community.”


“Move from Culturally irrelevant to Culturally Inspiring: We help churches to serve their community together in significant ways, reshaping people’s perceptions of God, Christianity and the Church.”


“Move from Missionally Ineffective to Missionally Effective: We help churches to fulfill the Great Commission by reaching their community more effectively, one life at a time.”


These are certainly five key shifts that are needed in the American church today. In a ministry culture that is driven by “my success” and the building of “my church” there is a deep need to repent of our selfish, autonomous ways that build our ego and pride and work to build His church, The church and reach our communities in humble partnership with the whole church.